[Incubator] Info on the Old OSGeo Labs
Cameron Shorter
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Sat Mar 12 17:31:11 PST 2016
+0 for using the "OSGeo Community" label to replace "OSGeo Labs". I'm
drawing a blank on thinking of a better word. Cameron
On 12/03/2016 5:52 am, Stephen Woodbridge wrote:
> I think think Community would meet our needs. +1 for that.
>
> -Steve
>
> On 3/11/2016 1:35 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> We have a strong negative reaction from Cameron for "Technology", and a
>> strong negative reaction from me for "Builder". That leaves "Community"
>> - it does meet our need of being inclusive and welcoming projects into
>> OSGeo.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 11 March 2016 at 09:52, Landon Blake <sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I know there are some people that don't like the "Technology" name,
>> but we did hold a vote of committee members. I'll remind everyone
>> that these three names were tied for the top choice:
>>
>> "Community Project", "Builder Project" and "Technology Project".
>>
>> I think we should stick with one of these top 3 and not reopen this
>> debate on the name. If we keep doing that, we won't make forward
>> progress. If we need to hold a quick e-mail vote to pick between the
>> 3 names that tied for top choice, then lets do that.
>>
>> Landon
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Jody Garnett
>> <jody.garnett at gmail.com <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Okay I got a naming idea - that should at least work. I thank
>> everyone for this difficult discussion - much more important to
>> set expectations and scope now (then later once the program has
>> gone live).
>>
>> I initially liked "Innovator" - sadly it had too much of an RnD
>> focus and the resulting projects would not come across as
>> stable. So not especially suitable of pgRouting. Their is also
>> the danger that established osgeo projects would feel left out
>> such "innovation" has a nice marketing ring to it - Jeroen
>> expressed this valid concern.
>>
>> I liked "Technology" - taking things firmly in the direction of
>> established (but too busy or too small for incubation). Very
>> suitable for projects like JTS, PRJ or pgRouting. Cameron
>> expressed concern on branding confusion with respect to
>> foundation projects - a table could help mitigate this some what
>> but if is a valid concern.
>>
>> I am having a hard time coming up with a new name. Our initial
>> enthusiasm with a poll missed on the discussion we could put
>> behind each name.
>>
>> One Idea I am trying to make work (it does not work) is "Dev"
>> (not development - but like our dev and devel
>> <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo> email lists ...). It
>> has a bit too much of an RnD flavour - when applied to JTS, or
>> PgRouting the resulting technology does not sound finished. It
>> does however reflect the open source and community (that is the
>> people side) of the technology - there is a clear distinction
>> between foundations project and dev. So it is close - but much
>> like "builder" it sounds incomplete and not fully acknowledged
>> as being part of the foundation.
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 8 March 2016 at 12:30, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com
>> <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the support/discussion Daniel/Cameron - I am open
>> to a word other than "OSGeo Technology".
>>
>> Many of the other words proposed missed the point of the
>> exercise... it is more useful to think of a project like
>> pgRouting <http://pgrouting.org> or PROJ
>> <https://trac.osgeo.org/proj/> than to think of 100 lines of
>> javascript.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 8 March 2016 at 12:25, Cameron Shorter
>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Jody,
>> As per Daniel's comment.
>> +1 to OSGeo being more inclusive by providing a light
>> weight process for joining (in line with your
>> suggestions)
>> -1 for the words "OSGeo Technology". Are you open to
>> changing to another word than "Technology"?
>>
>>
>> On 9/03/2016 2:22 am, Daniel Morissette wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jody,
>>
>> FWIW I like the idea of a more inclusive place such
>> as the former "OSGeo Labs", I was even one of the
>> early supporters of the idea.
>>
>> The only concern that I expressed earlier was to
>> make sure that terminology and expectations are
>> clear for visitors to the site. I don't want this to
>> be perceived as a blocker, it was just a
>> constructive comment to help clarify the wording to
>> make sure that users know what they are getting from
>> what we call OSGeo projects vs OSGeo technology.
>>
>> Perhaps a comparison page to address the differences
>> between Projects vs Technology would help address
>> the possible confusion?
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>> On 2016-03-08 10:13 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> We are setting something up different that is
>> not OSGeo labs. We are
>> validating - that these projects are open source
>> and participatory.
>>
>> The result is hopefully a larger OSGeo
>> community.
>>
>> This direction comes out of a board discussion
>> around being inclusive
>> and innovative. It could be the OSGeo Technology
>> idea won't fly ...
>>
>> Our OSGeo incubation process is set up for
>> stability and safety. While I
>> respect this it is holding us back from
>> including different categories
>> of projects.
>>
>> I think the larger issue for the board to
>> wrestle with is that the
>> foundation does not provide enough value to
>> projects. While they are
>> willing to step up assistance (say incubation
>> sprint or external code
>> review) we on the incubation list need to look
>> at our priorities on who
>> we can extend this assistance to.
>>
>> I would still like to see projects like
>> pgRouting try their hand at
>> incubation. I think it is a shame incubation.
>> and the foundation, is
>> considered hard.
>>
>> In fact open source is hard, and we are here to
>> help.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 2:35 AM Cameron Shorter
>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Jody,
>> I'm actually agreeing with all you are
>> suggesting doing with the
>> rebranded "OSGeo Labs", except the name
>> "OSGeo Technology". This
>> name misrepresents the "Self Serve",
>> non-validated concept of "OSGeo
>> Labs". The name implies "built out of OSGeo
>> Projects". This is a
>> dis-service to people who come to our site
>> for the first time, a
>> dis-service to "OSGeo Projects" who now
>> become associated with
>> immature projects.
>>
>> Pick a more accurate name than "OSGeo
>> Technology" and I'd back the
>> rest of what you are suggesting.
>>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>>
>> On 7/03/2016 9:55 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> This is going to be a tough one Cameron
>> ... our brand currently
>> has a reputation for turning projects
>> away ... not quality.
>>
>> The long story short is how to respond
>> to the direction to be
>> inclusive. We have two strong
>> characters on this mailing list with
>> an axe to grind making it difficult for
>> projects to be part of
>> OSGeo. I am very keen on projects
>> *being* open source, and you are
>> very keen on making projects safe for
>> users to adopt (project
>> viability, quality, open standards).
>>
>> I am proposing repurposing "OSGeo Labs"
>> (which did not promise
>> anything as a brand and got adopted by
>> GeoForAll) as "OSGeo
>> Technology" to focus on the open source
>> angle; in order to
>> preserve "OSGeo Projects" (and
>> incubation) to focus on the second.
>>
>> We have a tension here between being
>> inclusive (read easy) and
>> transparent (which takes effort).
>>
>> How would you like to add
>> "transparency" to this mix? We could
>> provide a table with website, download,
>> documentation, test
>> results - not sure if that would help
>> with transparency?
>>
>> I know we keep coming back to a rating
>> system on this mailing list
>> - I recognize your work in this area
>> for OSGeo Live with the
>> introduction of black duck metrics. I
>> imagine you would also be
>> happy to phrase things as positive
>> "badges" (for projects that
>> have documentation, or quality
>> assurance, or standards
>> testing). For quality, documentation
>> and so forth I think we are
>> stuck leading by example (and perhaps
>> working with the OGC on
>> standards compliance).
>>
>> On 3 March 2016 at 23:57, Cameron
>> Shorter
>> <<mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jody,
>> I agree with your suggestion that
>> "Old OSGeo Labs" need not
>> have an aim of entering OSGeo
>> incubation.
>> However, I object to any project
>> becoming associated with
>> OSGeo without it being obvious
>> about the level of quality
>> control the project has gone
>> through.
>>
>> As suggested below, I could knock
>> together 100 lines of
>> uncommented, non-working code, give
>> it an open source license,
>> and then add a "OSGeo Technology"
>> logo to the home page. And
>> most average punters wouldn't know
>> the difference between term
>> "OSGeo Project" and "OSGeo
>> Technology". This would result in
>> diminishing the current association
>> between OSGeo applications
>> and quality, which would be a bad
>> thing.
>>
>> I feel "OSGeo Labs", "OSGeo
>> Community Builder Projects", or
>> shortened to "OSGeo Builder
>> Projects" are less likely to be
>> confused with "OSGeo Incubated"
>> projects.
>>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>>
>> On 4/03/2016 2:13 am, Stephen
>> Woodbridge wrote:
>>
>> +1, I think these changes make
>> a lot of sense and as part
>> of an OSGeo Technology project
>> this feels very inclusive.
>>
>> -Steve W
>>
>> On 3/3/2016 9:46 AM, Jody
>> Garnett wrote:
>>
>> I would like to change the
>> tone of the page a bit,
>> since it "assumes"
>> incubation ..
>>
>> /OSGeo Labs is an
>> umbrella for open source
>> geospatial software
>> projects that would
>> like to become OSGeo projects
>> in the future, but
>> that aren't ready for
>> incubation quite yet. It is
>> appropriate to
>> submit your new or
>> experimental project as an
>> OSGeo labs project./
>> /
>> /
>> /The volunteers that
>> work as part of OSGeo Labs
>> have the goal of
>> helping OSGeo Labs
>> Projects qualify for
>> incubation. To reach this
>> goal, OSGeo Labs
>> volunteers help OSGeo Labs
>> Projects with the
>> following tasks:
>> /
>>
>>
>> Would become:
>>
>> /Welcome to OSGeo
>> Technology. The projects listed
>> here are part of
>> the Open Source
>> Geospatial Foundation and range
>> from new
>> experimental projects
>> to established pillars of
>> our open source
>> ecosystem./
>> /
>> /
>> /All projects here meet
>> our goals as an
>> organization - they are
>> open
>> source (no really we
>> checked) and are inclusive
>> and welcoming to new
>> contributors./
>> /
>> /
>>
>> /Projects that go on to
>> establish excellence in
>> community building,
>> documentation, and
>> governance can enter our
>> "incubation" program. /
>>
>>
>> I would also lose the
>> "status" conditions
>> seed/seedling/sapling/adult
>> and keep OSGeo Technology
>> focused on the basics (open
>> source &
>> inclusive). The status
>> becomes having the "OSGeo
>> Technology" badge nice
>> and simple.
>>
>> Thinking this through a bit
>> more we have one clear
>> reason for projects
>> to go through with
>> incubation - being recognized by
>> the board and having
>> an OSGeo Officer listed
>> directly for the project,
>> while OSGeo Technology
>> projects "share" an officer
>> (as part of "incubation
>> committee").
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 11 February 2016 at
>> 11:04, Landon Blake
>>
>> <sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com>
>>
>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com>>
>>
>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com>
>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>>
>> There is some good
>> information on what we were
>> trying to achieve
>> with the old OSGeo Labs
>> on the wiki:
>>
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Labs
>>
>> I think most of that
>> information on the wiki still
>> applies. This
>> includes the purpose of
>> labs, how projects get
>> started in labs, what
>> labs is trying to
>> accomplish, and the criteria to
>> determine if your
>> project is a good fit
>> for labs.
>>
>> Does anyone have major
>> heartburn with what is laid
>> out on that wiki
>> page? (I'll rename the
>> wiki page as soon as we get
>> a new name for labs.)
>>
>> Landon
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>>
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>>
>>
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>>
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>>>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>>
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for
>> viruses by Avast antivirus
>> software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> LISAsoft
>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW
>> 2009
>>
>> P +61 2 9009 5000
>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000>
>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000>, W
>> www.lisasoft.com <http://www.lisasoft.com>
>> <http://www.lisasoft.com>, F +61 2 9009 5099
>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> LISAsoft
>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>
>> P +61 2 9009 5000
>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000>, Wwww.lisasoft.com
>> <http://Wwww.lisasoft.com>
>> <http://www.lisasoft.com>, F +61 2 9009 5099
>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> LISAsoft
>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>
>> P +61 2 9009 5000 <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000>, W
>> www.lisasoft.com <http://www.lisasoft.com>, F +61 2
>> 9009 5099 <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Incubator mailing list
> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099
More information about the Incubator
mailing list